Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19171 (DEL)

GAURAV GOEL v. GOVT.NCT OF DELHI THROUGH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS.

W.P.(C)/11126/2026 · 2026-09-18

Jasmeet Singh

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~57 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010357822026 + W.P.(C) 11126/2026 & CM APPL. 51443/2026 GAURAV GOEL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Manthan Tripathi, Mr. Pramod Tripathi, Mr. Kaustubh Bhatnagar, Mr. Aditya Tripathi , Mr. Tushar Tripathi, Advs. versus GOVT.NCT OF DELHI THROUGH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Dr. Sumit Kumar, Ms. Simran Khosla, Advs. for R2 Mr. Prashant Tripathi & Mr. Lakshay Jain, Advs. for R3 Mr. Abhinav Singh Advocate and Ms. Pearl Khurana Advocate for R-1 and SI Raj Kiran IFSO for DP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 18.09.2026 1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:- “1. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ of Mandamus, directing Respondent No. 1 (Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations (IFSO), Delhi Police) to forthwith issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) and/or withdraw the communication/instructions issued for freezing the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2026 at 12:02:35 Petitioners bank accounts, thereby permitting the Petitioner to freely and lawfully operate his savings bank accounts, maintained with respondent No. 2 and 3 2. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ of Mandamus, directing Respondent No. 2 (Axis Bank) and Respondent No. 3 (IDFC First Bank) to forthwith remove the debit freeze/lien and de- freeze the Petitioner's savings bank accounts i.e. Axis Bank Account No 921010043921378 & IDFC Bank Account 10211175047 and restore their full operational status, and permit the Petitioner to operate the said accounts without any restriction or impediment.....” 2. The petitioner has an account bearing No. 921010043921378 with the respondent No. 2 and 10211175047 with the respondent No. 3. The aforesaid accounts of the petitioner have been frozen by both the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and hence, the petitioner is unable to perform his day-to-day functions. 3. SI Raj Kiran from Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations (IFSO) is present in Court today and has handed over a status report, wherein it is stated that the disputed amount in the petitioner’s account is Rs. 25,050/-. The status report handed over has been taken on record. 4. Since the disputed amount is Rs. 25,050/-, the entire accounts of the petitioner should not be frozen, as it has serious consequences. 5. I am of the view that the freezing of an account is an action entailing serious consequences creating hardships for the petitioner herein as This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2026 at 12:02:35 the same happens to be the salary account of the petitioner and the same will result in extreme hardships and inconvenience to the petitioner. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 cannot be permitted to take such harsh measures without any application of mind. 6. For the said reasons, the impugned action of account freezing in the present case is disproportionate and an arbitrary exercise of power thereby striking a blow at the fundamental rights of the petitioner. The impugned action is without due application of mind as an indiscriminate blanket freeze has been imposed on the account of the petitioner for an allegedly suspicious entry of a meagre amount. 7. Subject to the respondent No. 2 maintaining a lien on Rs. 13,050/- on account bearing No. 921010043921378 and respondent No. 3 maintaining a lien on Rs. 12,000/- on account bearing No. 10211175047, the petitioner shall be permitted to operate both the aforesaid accounts. 8. Mr. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that in view of this order, the petitioner does not press the present petition with liberty to take action for de-freezing of Rs. 25,050/- in terms of the SOP. 9. Granting the said liberty, the petition is disposed of. JASMEET SINGH, J SEPTEMBER 18, 2026 / (MS) This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2026 at 12:02:35